61–70 of 208 posts
That blog mentioned it but still, the timing of when it happened and who got control of them is odd af.
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2021/04/penta...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Remembering and hand manipulating IPv6 addresses is not something end users need to deal with. Like everyone else on my ISP, I have a publicly routeable v6 subnet at home and v6 addresses on my phones. I couldn't tell you what they are, but they work just fine.
> Remembering and hand manipulating IPv6 addresses is not something end users need to deal with. Assuming it's configured correctly. Most devices are not. > Like everyone else on my ISP, I have a publicly routeable v6 subnet at home and v6 addresses on my phones. I couldn't tell you what they are, but they work just fine. Why would you ever want publicly routable addresses on devices inside your home? If Ipv6 was sim…
Aren't they? I've never seen a home user fight with IPv6
> Why would you ever want publicly routable addresses on devices inside your home?
Because that's how the internet is supposed to work. It's what protocols are designed for. IPv4's shortcomings have led to many stupid security issues (SIP ALG, FTP ALG, all the other ALGs, all allowing anyone website to punch a hole straight through consumer firewalls). I don't know what insecure-by-default devices you use, but all routers I've seen come with a firewall enabled by default set to deny all incoming traffic.
If you don't want that for some reason, feel free to NAT66 your network into your own chosen ULA.
IPv6 is no more of a flaming security dumpster fire than IPv4.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the point is that they're not using it. If it's not addressable from the internet, why not use 10.0.0.0/8 instead?
For some applications, it's valuable to have globally-unique addresses even if they're not (all) broadly accessible from the open Internet. For example, if you're building private links between networks which don't share an authority for distributing private network addresses (they're administered by different companies or organizations perhaps). I don't know how common this is anymore, but I've seen it in the past.
For a real-life example of that: according to documentation which can be found at its website, the Brazilian Central Bank has been allocated a full /18 for the national inter-bank network; each financial institution connected to that network receives a /27 or a /28 (or a pair of them) from that range. If you look up that address range on bgp.he.net, you'll find out that it's not announced to the public Internet at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought apple owned the 17.0.0.0/8 netblock?
They do.
Even the article defined it as IP space not owned.
From the parent article "I will define IP address squatting as “using IP addresses that are not RFC1918 defined and not your unicast space issued by a RIR”."
Unless this is meant to construe all legacy assignments as "squatting" which is a pants on head definition.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They do.
Then how is it squatting? Even the article defined it as IP space not owned. From the parent article "I will define IP address squatting as “using IP addresses that are not RFC1918 defined and not your unicast space issued by a RIR”." Unless this is meant to construe all legacy assignments as "squatting" which is a pants on head definition.
Using IPs for internal networking doesn't necessarily mean under utilizing though; but might not be enough to justify such an assignment today.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the point is that they're not using it. If it's not addressable from the internet, why not use 10.0.0.0/8 instead?
Why 10.0.0.0/8 is as it is now and why IBM used to be 9.0.0.0/8 in the first place?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would that be relevant here (or sibling comment about Apple)? Last I checked except for 9.9.9.0/24 (to quad9) IBM is indeed the assignee for 9.0.0.0/8 from back in 1992. Apple got 17.0.0.0/8 back in 1990. Back in the day a lot of big entities got whole /8 blocks (including of course a lot of the USG but private corps as well). Many of them are still around and fully active, while others are defunct (Halliburton h…
Of a highly constrained resource, they're using a tiny fraction of what they've been given. That's a weird definition of "using what they have." If I asked for a class C for my business running a local corner store, I'd be looked at like I was crazy. IBM gets 16 million public IPs and it's cool? Yeah, I know you can't perfectly use an IP space, but with 128 offices, IBM could give each office an allocation of around…
I worked for a couple of small and mid-sized companies that had /16's and larger. And we barely used a fraction of that space.
I have a /24, personally, registered back in 1993. It's routed to my home network. I know several other folks who were on the early internet, and had the same.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would that be relevant here (or sibling comment about Apple)? Last I checked except for 9.9.9.0/24 (to quad9) IBM is indeed the assignee for 9.0.0.0/8 from back in 1992. Apple got 17.0.0.0/8 back in 1990. Back in the day a lot of big entities got whole /8 blocks (including of course a lot of the USG but private corps as well). Many of them are still around and fully active, while others are defunct (Halliburton h…
Of a highly constrained resource, they're using a tiny fraction of what they've been given. That's a weird definition of "using what they have." If I asked for a class C for my business running a local corner store, I'd be looked at like I was crazy. IBM gets 16 million public IPs and it's cool? Yeah, I know you can't perfectly use an IP space, but with 128 offices, IBM could give each office an allocation of around…
If you want to pick on a company for hogging IPv4 space, pick on Apple. They have a /8 and probably aren't using any of it.
About 10 years ago, IBM used to use the 9.0.0.0/8 space in basically exactly the same way as one would use 10.0.0.0/8, for internal-only networking. Each workstation got its own 9.x.x.x IP, but it wasn't routable from outside. I hope they stopped doing that, but I doubt it.
edit: Just did a quick WHOIS. They still have the /16 even though the university doesn't exist any more (merged with another). Crazy.